>The 1930s are not a very inspiring example. Depression, fascism, and
>world war - is that what you're looking for? Angus Maddison's stats
>don't show much of a benefit for Latin America during the 1930s; the
>region had a per capita GDP about 31% of the U.S. in 1930, and about
>the same in 1940. Bourgeois stats, I know.
>
>
I'm not going to plump for the 1930's as an inspiring decade, but I disagree with the analysis here. The '30's caused a regime shift. It may not be visible in the stats for that decade, but it shows up in the stats for the subsequent three. In Europe, the Depression finally forced countries off the gold standard and laid the basis for a postwar full-employment monetary policy. Probably couldn't have happened without the shock of the Slump. In Latin America, it forced a political-intellectual revolution towards the goal of building industry instead of aiming for "complementary" production with Europe. Brazil and Mexico never would have built formidable industrial bases without that 1930's shift. Those bases show up in the stats from 1939-1979. (This is something I know a bit about - I wrote my undergrad thesis on this topic.)
Seth